IMHO vacuum it is only possible in language, and frankly I doubt that
too, because we need the word to refer it. I agree there is no vacuum.
Although there is a meaning, this is, we refer to vacuum, and that's
it.

On 30 nov, 10:24, michael atovigba <[email protected]> wrote:
> Just to observe that what is called a vacuum contains either light to enable
> physicists see that there is nothing inside the vacuum or darkness to
> frustrate them from seeing anything inside the space in question. But
> Eistein has told us that light is made of ether which is a particle hence
> the vacuum theory is nullified. If the vacuum contains darkness, but
> darkness is the oposite of light hence it too is matter incorporated, may
> be we called anti-ether. Consequently there is no vacuum.
> -Garshagu Atovigba
>
>
>
> On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 9:17 AM, <[email protected]> wrote:
> >   Today's Topic Summary
>
> > Group:http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology/topics
>
> >    - Different points of 
> > view.<http://mail.google.com/mail/?ui=2&view=js&name=js&ver=ZZ4KpTfy1bY.en....>[13
> >  Updates]
> >    - Relativity One almost ready to use black 
> > fuel<http://mail.google.com/mail/?ui=2&view=js&name=js&ver=ZZ4KpTfy1bY.en....>[3
> >  Updates]
> >    - Some ‘True’ Physical and Religious fables and 
> > fantasies.<http://mail.google.com/mail/?ui=2&view=js&name=js&ver=ZZ4KpTfy1bY.en....>[1
> >  Update]
> >    - Virgin Mary - new 
> > advent<http://mail.google.com/mail/?ui=2&view=js&name=js&ver=ZZ4KpTfy1bY.en....>[1
> >  Update]
> >    - [epistemology 0] Digest for [email protected] - 3
> >    Messages in 2 
> > Topics<http://mail.google.com/mail/?ui=2&view=js&name=js&ver=ZZ4KpTfy1bY.en....>[1
> >  Update]
> >    - B.O.DI.C.E.A. 
> > C.A.N.C.E.R.<http://mail.google.com/mail/?ui=2&view=js&name=js&ver=ZZ4KpTfy1bY.en....>[1
> >  Update]
> >    - Claude Levi-Strauss 
> > dies<http://mail.google.com/mail/?ui=2&view=js&name=js&ver=ZZ4KpTfy1bY.en....>[3
> >  Updates]
>
> >  Topic: Different points of 
> > view.<http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology/t/e352b1aa9c1664fe>
>
> >    ornamentalmind <[email protected]> Nov 27 12:57PM -0800
>
> >    I can, but will not. I will let you have the pleasure of doing your
> >    own research.
>
> >    "Serenity Smiles" <[email protected]> Nov 27 07:32PM
>
> >    Madhayamaka Buddhism vis a vis Hindu vedanta - this is a very good site
> >    to
> >    visit. have not studied it fully myself yet
>
> >    --------------------------------------------------
> >    From: "nominal9" <[email protected]>
> >    Sent: Friday, November 27, 2009 4:57 PM
> >    To: "Epistemology" <[email protected]>
> >    Subject: [epistemology 10995] Re: Different points of view.
>
> >    archytas <[email protected]> Nov 27 10:06PM -0800
>
> >    I would doubt Nom that any of this kind of void has anything to do
> >    with thoughts in physics about the nature of emptiness. This is about
> >    essential conditions in being. I'd admit to some similarities with
> >    relativity. There is stuff to learn from these sources though I don't
> >    see it boiling down to much.
>
> >    On 27 Nov, 19:32, "Serenity Smiles" <[email protected]>
> >    wrote:
>
> >    archytas <[email protected]> Nov 27 10:13PM -0800
>
> >    'Holes' come in for much philosophical treatment too. Early atomist
> >    theories made much of them and voids. Newton got rather a long way by
> >    construing space as separate from body. If the experience of
> >    emptiness is to make all relative then I can't make it as I'm sure I
> >    wouldn't stay here if all was such.
>
> >    ornamentalmind <[email protected]> Nov 27 11:25PM -0800
>
> >    “… If the experience of emptiness is to make all relative then I can't
> >    make it as I'm sure I wouldn't stay here if all was such.” – archy
>
> >    No need to leave then Neil!
>
> >    As far as I can tell, there is no ‘making’ involved…such activity
> >    would be like standing before one of Van Gogh’s Starry Night paintings
> >    and tagging it (spray painting it). In this sense, what is …is.
>
> >    In an apparently different sense, any such analysis of anything
> >    apprehended through the senses will include a related conceptual
> >    nature (as well as a contextual nature). Emptiness merely means the
> >    truth that anything is empty of inherent existence. No thing/thought
> >    arises out of nothing. Further, such things have component parts. If
> >    they are conceptual or perceptual, specific thoughts/words etc. are
> >    involved and have direct links to it and those so linked things are a
> >    part and parcel of the thing currently under investigation. Thus, it
> >    is related to other things/thoughts/concepts etc. Being so related
> >    directly implies a relationship and relative nature. This all
> >    identifies the set of relative/subjective ‘mind’.
>
> >    There also exists that which has no components or movement. This is
> >    the absolute/objective ‘mind’.
>
> >    And, we have in fact produced a synthetic separation here too.
>
> >    On a more mundane level, Albert E.’s addition of relativity to western
> >    thought has helped to support and change previous anti-metaphysical
> >    views. The result is the philosophical corner currently most find
> >    themselves painted into. A more practical level helps one to
> >    understand how politicians, educators, thinkers etc. now find no
> >    ‘center’…no ethos other than one without a possibility of actual
> >    ethics. This because ‘everything is relative’. Well, it is for their
> >    thinking…but not in any other way.
>
> >    Georges Metanomski <[email protected]> Nov 27 11:29PM -0800
>
> >    =============
> >    G:
> >    There are no "thoughts in physics about the nature of emptiness".
> >    Physics never met her.
> >    Georges
> >    ================
>
> >    socratus <[email protected]> Nov 28 02:56AM -0800
>
> >    > Georges
> >    > ================
>
> >    I would doubt Nom that any of this
> >    kind of void has anything to do
> >    with thoughts in physics about the nature of
> >    emptiness.
> >    / archytas <[email protected]> /
>
> >    =============== .
> >    #
> >    Don’t be doubt ‘ archytas <[email protected]> ‘
> >    1.
> >    Thermodynamics meets with the Void/ Emptiness/ Vacuum.
> >    2.
> >    Maxwell electrodynamics meets with the Void/ Emptiness/ Vacuum.
> >    3.
> >    SRT meets with the Void/ Emptiness/ Vacuum.
> >    4
> >    GRT meets with the Void/ Emptiness/ Vacuum.
> >    5.
> >    Atom meets with the Void/ Emptiness/ Vacuum.
> >    6.
> >    Outer space meets with the Void/ Emptiness/ Vacuum.
> >    7.
> >    Religion doesn’t exist without the Void/ Emptiness/ Vacuum.
> >    == .
> >    #
> >    When the next revolution rocks physics,
> >    chances are it will be about nothing—the vacuum, that endless
> >    infinite void.
> >    http://discovermagazine.com/topics/space
>
> >    http://discovermagazine.com/2008/aug/18-nothingness-of-space-theory-o...
> >    !!!!!!!!!!!
> >    ================ . .
>
> >    archytas <[email protected]> Nov 28 05:09AM -0800
>
> >    Surely there are some thoughts Georges, otherwise how do we arrive at
> >    the notion of something 'empty' only on average?
>
> >    archytas <[email protected]> Nov 28 05:10AM -0800
>
> >    Relativity can be traced to much earlier times than Einstein. I'm not
> >    sure the corner is painted to anyway. Most current problems are to do
> >    with idiot thinking.
>
> >    Georges Metanomski <[email protected]> Nov 28 05:25AM -0800
>
> >    ============
> >    G:
> >    Not in physics. And even in current language "empty glass" means
> >    having no wine, but contains air. And words are there to HINT
> >    the meaning, but taken verbatim hide it.
> >    Georges
> >    ==============
>
> >    nominal9 <[email protected]> Nov 28 06:31AM -0800
>
> >    I can, but will not. I will let you have the pleasure of doing your
> >    own research. / Ornamentalmind
>
> >    Oh, so that;s the way of it, is it?... Well, if you're going to be
> >    "snooty".... let me be a bit "sarcastic" in return....If I assume that
> >    this "void" exists only in some contemplative or meditative state
> >    attained in the mind of the Adept... does that mean that the said
> >    Adept-practitioner is .... empty-headed?....
> >    nominal9
>
> >    ornamentalmind <[email protected]> Nov 28 08:47AM -0800
>
> >    ...for you, the 'lazy' one, it is nom! :-)
>
> >    ornamentalmind <[email protected]> Nov 28 08:52AM -0800
>
> >    Interesting notion archy...idiot thinking. With almost 20 million
> >    Google hits, one would think I should know what it means. Alas, I am
> >    lacking in that regard…having no specific tenets for this class of
> >    thought let alone other criteria for it other than obviously I don’t
> >    think that way. (irony)
>
> >  Topic: Relativity One almost ready to use black 
> > fuel<http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology/t/d1cbda86735dced9>
>
> >    archytas <[email protected]> Nov 27 10:21PM -0800
>
> >    There are some interesting bits and pieces around about close to light
> >    flight using dark matter. This would allow rapid acceleration to near
> >    the speed of light, but has a downside in that we would have to get
> >    close to the galaxy centre to find enough of the stuff (one reason the
> >    aliens ain't here is because we lack the stuff). One possibility
> >    would be to get out there using antimatter or fusion power. All ideas
> >    welcomed. Containing dark matter might be tough, but there may be
> >    particles that interaction strongly with it and our general stuff.
> >    And what about the biology of getting to and being at close to light
> >    speeds?
>
> >    Georges Metanomski <[email protected]> Nov 27 11:24PM -0800
>
> >    =============
> >    There is dark matter and there is dark grasp. The fabric of dark matter
> >    is as yet unknown and there are only timid trials to form some
> >    hypothesis. One is mine in
> >    http://findgeorges.com/ROOT/SECOND_ENLIGHTENMENT/0h_dark_matter.html
> >    How good it is I can't say, but at least it tries to shed some light
> >    on the dark.
> >    Georges
> >    ===============
>
> >    archytas <[email protected]> Nov 28 05:04AM -0800
>
> >    It is easier in my book Georges, thanks to no need for language for
> >    the characters other than in leisure pursuits. I did think of a big
> >    sail ship powered by lasers using energy from an array cooling the
> >    Earth. By the time I was reading about non-particle particles, the
> >    realisation I'm writing for three-quarter wits who struggle with
> >    elementary trig made me give up on staying too close to what might be
> >    in current speculation. The phrase metalanguage shorthand is useful.
> >    Can't find a beep on biological implications other than the clocks
> >    running slower etc.
>
> >  Topic: Some ‘True’ Physical and Religious fables and 
> > fantasies.<http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology/t/5dd556974ff56a88>
>
> >    socratus <[email protected]> Nov 28 03:30AM -0800
>
> >    Some ‘True’ Physical and Religious fables and fantasies.
> >    ========
> >    Religion tells us nothing but fables and fantasies!
> >    That is the truth.
> >    For example: God created woman from Adam’s rib,
> >    using physical laws. So, what is Religion?
> >    Religion is the poor man's philosophy.
>
> >    Modern Physics tells us nothing but fables and fantasies!
> >    That is the truth.
> >    For example: One Galaxy can eat another Galaxy.
> >    #
> >    Cosmic cannibalising:
> >    Images show one galaxy engulfing another
>
> >    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/cosmic-cannibalising-images...
> >    #
> >    The Discovery of one Galaxy "Attacking" Another
>
> >    http://www.astronomyexpert.co.uk/the-recent-discovery-of-one-galaxy-a...
> >    . . .. etc
> >    So, what is Physics?
> >    Physics is the poor man's philosophy.
> >    == .
> >    What to do?
> >    I think we must answer to the simple classic question:
> >    what did come first the chicken or the egg ?
> >    If somebody didn’t understand this question, I will ask it simpler:
> >    What was before Vacuum or Gravity ?
> >    Does Gravity exist in Vacuum or vice versa?
> >    Why I ask these questions.
> >    Because the Universe ( as a whole ) is Two- Measured,
> >    there are two Worlds: Vacuum and Gravity.
> >    === .
> >    Some more ‘ true’ Physical fables and fantasies.
> >    === .
> >    1.
> >    The Big Bang.
> >    Once upon a time, 20 billions of years ago, all matter
> >    (all elementary particles and all quarks and their
> >    girlfriends- antiparticles and antiquarks, all kinds of
> >    waves: electromagnetic, gravitational, muons…
> >    gluons field ….. etc.) – was assembled in a ‘single point ‘
> >    === .
> >    I don’t agree with the ‘big bang’ theory because nobody
> >    knows how the ‘ big bang’ can change into ‘single point ‘
> >    if Hawking’s radiation from ‘ black hole’ doesn’t give it
> >    to happen.
> >    2.
> >    Most of elementary particles were got in artificial way,
> >    using accelerators. This way, in my opinion, is mistaken.
> >    === .
> >    In the Ancient Egypt people believed in many gods with
> >    human body and animal’s head. They thought they really
> >    existed. For me these new discovered elementary artificial
> >    particles are similar to Egyptian’s gods because we cannot
> >    meet them into any atom, in any physical, chemical, biological
> >    processes on our Earth.
> >    In the Ancient Greek the people believed that sphinxes and
> >    centaurs really exist. Maybe now some geneticists can create
> >    a centaur, but it will be Devil’s work. I am sorry to tell that,
> >    but it seems to me, physicists, creating such elementary
> >    artificial particles look like those ‘some geneticists’.
> >    ( The mad CERN’s way.
>
> >    http://www.spacekb.com/Uwe/Forum.aspx/astronomy/13338/The-mad-CERN-s-...
> >    )
> >    =========== .
> >    3.
> >    Once upon a time, 20 billions of years ago, there was ‘ bin bang’.
> >    And every particle appears with its own spin as derivative from
> >    the Big Bang.
> >    == .
> >    I think the spin of quantum particle doesn’t come from
> >    big bang, but it comes with ‘ virtual particle from Dirac’s sea’.
> >    Why?
> >    We have the real particle – electron. Nobody doubts
> >    it is a real particle. But a strange thing happens when it
> >    interacts with Vacuum. All its physical parameters become
> >    infinite. Why? Is it possible? What is the reason?
> >    #
> >    The conditions of the ocean permitted to create different kinds
> >    of fish. The terrestrial’s conditions permitted to create different
> >    kinds of animals. And the ‘mixed’ conditions of water, earth
> >    and air on Earth permitted to create, for example, birds, which
> >    live and act in these three conditions.
> >    And if we take Universe as a whole, it is Two- Measured:
> >    close by Material ( Gravity) World exists Infinite Vacuum World.
> >    The conditions in these two Worlds are different.
> >    And when electron moves from Material (Gravity) World to the
> >    Infinite Vacuum World its physical parameters changes.
> >    " The law of conservation and transformation energy / mass"
> >    is connected with electron’s transformation.
>
> >    We know the electron is very important particle in our live.
> >    It acts in Maxwell’s electrodynamics.
> >    It acts in the atom.
> >    But how electron acts in cell and in Outer space we don’t know.
> >    We need time to understand this fact.
> >    === .
> >    P.S.
> >    Tell me what an electron is and I'll then tell you everything.
> >    / Somebody./
> >    ==== .
> >    Another ‘ true’ Physical fables and fantasies:
> >    The time that stretches and space that expands,
> >    dark matter, dark energy, Higgs boson, quarks, gluons
> >    and tachyons, axions and partons, qravitino ,
> >    ‘ method of renormalization ‘ . . etc.
> >    ========== .
> >    P.S.
> >    " One thing I have learned in a long life:
> >    that all our science, measured against reality, is primitive
> >    and childlike - and yet it is the most precious thing we have."
> >    / Einstein./
> >    This quote is correct, because, at last, only Physics can
> >    logically explain us the Ultimate Nature of Reality.
> >    ==========.
> >    Best wishes.
> >    Israel Sadovnik. Socratus.
>
> >    ======================== .
>
> >  Topic: Virgin Mary - new 
> > advent<http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology/t/6d40493ffb4e1423>
>
> >    "Serenity Smiles" <[email protected]> Nov 28 10:07AM
>
> >    Father
> >    Unknown
> >    Conceptualised
> >    Kin
> >    Including
> >    Natural
> >    Grandfather
>
> >    Lives
> >    In
> >    Artificial
> >    Reality
> >    Systems
>
> >    Reverse this and see what happens, make it a legal right to know one's
> >    family tree, no-one is conceptualised fatherless
>
> >  Topic: [epistemology 0] Digest for [email protected] - 3
> > Messages in 2 
> > Topics<http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology/t/dae60d139848d6fc>
>
> >    Hem Joshi <[email protected]> Nov 28 11:34AM +0530
>
> >    The Topic "Different points of view" in itself is a great subject of
> >    discussion where everyone can explore his/her own potentials and
> >    knowledge
> >    about anything that exists in our Universe/country/society/village/
> >    town/lane/home and above all within his/her own existence. Its like a
> >    nuclear chain reaction where every single atom is exited to the extent
> >    to utilize its last existence.
>
> >    --
> >    with regards,
>
> >    Hem Joshi
>
> >  Topic: B.O.DI.C.E.A. 
> > C.A.N.C.E.R.<http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology/t/1f7984c99d58fb31>
>
> >    archytas <[email protected]> Nov 27 04:03PM -0800
>
> >    Perhaps he's one of those technojerkoffs who have worked out how to
> >    embed machine code in the run of text and its trying to spread
> >    viruses? I'm off to Pharyngula for some atheist company.
>
> >  Topic: Claude Levi-Strauss 
> > dies<http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology/t/3d906bddb68a1406>
>
> >    archytas <[email protected]> Nov 27 12:00PM -0800
>
> >    Couldn't agree more - these enquiries are Blott on the Landscape. I
> >    have at least triumphed in disabling my capslock key!
>
> >    chazwin <[email protected]> Nov 27 12:14PM -0800
>
> >    I find pressing it works
>
> >    archytas <[email protected]> Nov 27 01:44PM -0800
>
> >    The bastard was responsible for 90% of my typos. Now I can hit it as
> >    often as I like without ending up re-writing. Of course, I had to
> >    bribe the whole Belgian Government to do this! I still hold out a
> >    little hope that such 'roadblocks' are what stop was getting a half-
> >    way decent society. I'm working on a similar fix for politicians and
> >    religionists.
>
> >  --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > "Epistemology" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > [email protected]<epistemology%2bunsubscr...@google 
> > groups.com>
> > .
> > For more options, visit this group at
> >http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology?hl=en.

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Epistemology" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology?hl=en.


Reply via email to